Is DxO PureRAW 2023 the RAW Processor the Fujifilm World Has Been Waiting For?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 янв 2025
- DxO PureRAW is a demosaicing and noise removal tool for RAW files. It was recently updated to support Fuji RAW files and I put it through its paces.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Finally, someone who actually speaks the language. Clear and bloody useful. Thanks, Andy
Thank-you kindly - pleased it helped :)
Thanks Andy, that’s the easiest & most comprehensive explanation of the DxO software I’ve seen so far. Great channel, please keep it up. Simon.
Thanks Simon - appreciate the support :)
I just tried it. AMAZING results. And really easy to use. The file gets stored in my CaptureOne session folder.
That's a result then. :)
I’ve used Capture One for several years after hating Lightroom’s wormy artefacts. However I’ll definitely give Pure Raw a try. Thanks!
Definitely worth taking the 30 day trial for a spin and seeing if it's a good fit for your photography. :)
thanks that was wonderful... I am having issues with my GFX 100s files in LR
Thanks Andy, I am about to make my camera purchase Fuji 100S II or Nikon Z8. I was leaning more to Z8 due to the RAW processing issues. Your video has given me pause to reconsider my options and now that DO PureRAW 4 is out.
I love PureRAW. Sometimes I forget to run my photos through it before importing into Lightroom and I think, 'hold on, these look a bit off'.
Thanks and a good prez. I have PhotoLabs and have used (just) the equivalent features there rather thanks acquiring PR. My issue is when I travel I add my RAW files to the peerless LR Mobile for culling and a fair bit of editing. If I go to PR I’d have to leave any RAF processing until I’m home in front of my iMac.
Thanks Andy very helpful. You should get an affiliate link sorted as I would buy through your link for the detailed review.
Thanks mate. I prefer not to join affiliate schemes because I think it compromises the integrity of the review of the person watching it know the content creator gets a kickback on any prospective sales. :)
Andy, to address Lightroom-Fuji issues I was told to go into Lightroom preferences and change in Presets ---> GLOBAL: from Adobe Default in Camera settings. But then I noticed (and clicked) "Override global setting for specific cameras". Lightroom then recognized my X-H2. I then clicked "Create Default." Am I on the right page? Also, you mentioned you run DXO RAW for all your Fuji Raw files (as a general choice do you select PRIME or DEEP PRIME or DEEP PRIME XD (I'll assume you choose the later for high noise only photos)? Thinking of purchasing DXO Camera RAW 4.
Thanks,
Keith
The preferences setting enables you to automatically apply specific presets on a per camera basis. Saves a click on import and makes it set-and-forget. I have one each for my X-T4, DJI drone and iPhone. With DXO I've changed my process a bit - I import to LR, run through the shots flagging my picks and then I output those images to PureRAW. I like to keep the RAWs of the SDCard as an original source. I use Deep Prime as default - if it's a very noisy image (astro etc) then I use XD.
Great video! Thank you!
Thanks Boris :)
Thank you for your video Andy
I was considering to go to capture One but seeing your video I will stick on Lr.
How long will it takes when you will process 100 photos in DxO and transport into Lr?
Thank you in advance
Depends on your Mac/PC and the speed of your hard drive. Probably about 10 minutes on average. :)
Thanks for this excellent video Andy. What is your workflow using DXO Pure Raw 3. I use Photo Mechanic to cull and drag and drop into Lightroom to edit. How best would it be to incorporate DXO into this process please.
Andy, still educating myself as a Fuji/Lightroom user (so new to all of this: post processing, shooting in Manual mode, Fuji menu's, etc...!). My question is (from a response you gave in the comments below): Andy: "I tweaked my default import preset in Lightroom to specifically disable those basic camera corrections (ok, how did you do this?). I also completely zeroed all noise reduction and sharpening sliders (again, how did you do this?) as, by default, they apply a small amount of baseline input."
So how were these changes achieved? I'm assuming it’s done before any Fuji files are imported - otherwise, after import, then choosing the files you want to run through DXOPureRAW4 those imported files would already be effected by Lightroom presets. I'm new to all of this so pardon my ignorance. If you don't ask, you never find out - lol!
Thank you
Keith
All you have to do is set all the sliders to zero - work your way through the various tabs and remove the default settings that LR sometimes applies. Then you save it all out as a new preset and you get a clean import. The idea is to apply no processing until you use DxO on them. :)
@@Andyhutchinson Thanks so much for your expertise and time👍
great input. Thank you so much? Do I have to tell Lightroom, not to do its own lens correction, when using PureRAW in advance? Any sliders or checkboxes inside Lightroom in need to turn off, when using PureRAW?
Thanks Frank. Yea - just double-check it's not enabled so it doesn't get corrected twice. I tweaked my default import preset in Lightroom to specifically disable those basic camera corrections. I also completely zeroed all noise reduction and sharpening sliders as, by default, they apply a small amount of baseline input :)
@@Andyhutchinson Thanks Andy! Your answer was very helpful. 🙏🏼
Thanks for this video. Does it only work with Lr Classic or also with CC?
Round-trip editing only works with CC at this time.
You can see a significant difference between editing a Fujifilm raw file in Lightroom and Capture One. My question is, do you see that difference editing the enhanced image or both produce the same results?
I've never processed a RAW converted in PureRAW in Capture One - only in Lightroom. I suspect they'd be the same because the demosaicing and camera/lens corrections have already taken place. Interesting question though.
Andy, Thanks for such a detailed review. I have tried pureraw 3 with affinity photo and get light magenta highlights, I would appreciate if anyone has any ideas to overcome this.
That's a new one on me. My suggestion would be to send the RAW file to DxO and see if they can replicate the issue. As a company that places such a great emphasis on the quality of its decoding of camera optics I reckon they'd be interested to see it.
I think the best workflow is to do denoise and sharpening at the end of your editing, just before final output. Doesn't really make sense in the beginning. Hope they will allow users to use it at the end of editing in the future.
I was talking to the developers at Topaz about this a few years ago and they suggested the best order is to denoise first, then process according to your taste and sharpen last. The reason being that if you sharpen first, you're actually sharpening image noise which degrades the image quality slightly. And then of course when you process the image you degrade the sharpening anyway if you use any contrast-like adjustments such as texture or clarity.
Ok, I always like to do sharpening and denoise at the end, but I guess it is their choice.
After comparing PureRaw 2, PureRaw 3, and Lightroom Denoise across several videos in my own channel, I found Lightroom gives me the cleanest and most detailed results, with the best colors in most cases. PureRAW 3 actually gave worse results than PureRaw 2 in many cases. Lightroom's Denoise also gives you more flexibility in that you have adjustment to the level of denoising applied, where PureRaw only gives you the choice of the 4 engines and leaves the rest on Autopilot. Lastly, PureRaw doesn't have lens correction profiles for Viltrox and other X-mount lenses, nor plans to incorporate them when I inquired last year. Bottom line is, if I wasn't using Lightroom I would probably still use PureRaw but I find myself rarely touching it since LR added their Denoise feature.
I'm a fan of LR's denoise too and it's what I use in most instances because LR is my asset manager of choice as well and it's simply more convenient. Your comment's quite timely actually because I'm just testing PureRAW4 and will be releasing a video when it drops out of embargo on the 5th. Without giving too much away, one of the things I'm really liking in this latest version of PureRAW is its colour rendering. There's also been big changes in terms of denoising!
@@Andyhutchinson Andy, I am testing it and running Fujifilm Raw files through it. I can take a file from my GFX 100s and process it through PureRaw4, and the resulting processed files come back looking cleaner, sharper and more saturated than the native raw files from the camera. I then process the original file in LR and then do the same with the one through PureRaw4 and it's a world of difference. What I don't like about it, is the PureRaw files are huge. If I continue doing this, I will really fill my hard drive. Nevertheless, it's better than shifting over to CaptureOne which is very Fujifilm friendly.
Only issue I’ve found is you can’t use profiles anymore with capture one at that point and it’s a rather linear response
That's a pretty big one
Thanks' for a great review, i haven't purchased the camera yet and was interested to know how big approx. is a converted file from the new larger 40mp sensor ?
Converted files are about 100Mb each.
@@Andyhutchinson Hi Andy thanks for the information
Just moved over to Fujifilm after some 30 or so yrs with Nikon (X-T5) having sold Nikon equip. WORMS‼️
I've printed two images on P900 [1 @ A3 & - 1 @ A2 which show no abnormalities; using Luminar Neo as a LRc plug in].... but would like to edit that bit more. Your explanation for DXO PureRaw 2023 I think might now be for me due to your explanation... I'll now be watching more of your channel ..... I've just liked and subscribed....
Thanks James. If you're looking for the most consistently excellent results, then DxO is definitely the way to go. And welcome to team Fuji - you won't regret it!
@@Andyhutchinson I watched last night and opened MacBook, bought DXO, downloaded / installed. Returned to living room then watched another video of your talking about ADOBE and lightrooms addition (tried it and wow so DXO now has over £100 🥲
What does DXO PR do to file sizes? I understand they will get much bigger in terms of file size and this could eat up a lot of storage if you're processing an entire shoot there first and then importing to LR. Would it be better to just use the DXO LR plug in to process just your final selects and cut down on converting everything you shot?
Good question Harry. On my X-T4 - average file size is about 36Mb. DNGs generated from the same RAW files by PR are about 105Mb on average. So yes - a substantial size increase. I think your suggested workflow is the sensible way to go - pick your favourites and then convert and post-process.
all the reviews I’ve seen, including this one, recommend using PR first. You would still cull photos in LR though - incurring the larger file size - but only for the keepers. It seems to me all such SW increases the file size including LR’s new Refine feature
Will DxO Pure RAW 2023 work with Nikon RAW files? I find Topaz DeNouse AI to have inconsistent results.
Yes, it will definitely work with Nikon RAW files. Topaz is not nearly as good as it used to be, unfortunately. Download the free trial. I’d love to hear how it goes for you.
@Andyhutchinson Thank You!
How does this compare to the Adobe AI denoise?
It's better, but not "worth buying in addition to Lightroom" better.
so dxo pureraw beter then Iridient X-Transformer?
I think so, yes. Nice integration with apps like LR too.
This is good news. HOWEVER, it means yet another copy of my files. Owning a 40mp X-H2, disk space is quickly becoming premium.
Yea, there's a couple of ways of managing that. Firstly you could do the baseline conversion to DNG in PureRAW and delete the original RAWs or (the option I've started using) only convert your picks. From a landscape shoot of 200+ photos I usually end up with 10 I like and I just convert them, rather than the whole directory. :)
@@Andyhutchinson Yes, I've learned that lesson. Going thru my old photos and cleaning up the good ones.
Is the 'before' of the before-after really that bad? They look worse than my jpgs.
Does one need to have an active internet connection to use DxO PureRAW 3 or can it stand alone and function offline?
No internet connection required.
Excellent review. I have been using PURE RAW for about two weeks with Adobe LR and PS. It really is wonderful, and yes-just like getting a new set of high quality lenses. I have had excellent results with Nikon and Cannon, but the processing of RAF files from Fuji is miraculous. I abandoned the free trial yesterday and paid for the program at the Black Friday price. By the way, I don’t like having to navigate back to the correct library location after processing a file which is then put into a ‘Collection’ in LR. Is there a way to avoid this? Many thanks Andy.
Cheers Raymond. Unfortunately there's no way around the re-import process into LR. What I do is wait for LR to refresh into the 'Recent Import' collection, right click and select 'Go to folder in Library'. It's annoying that it's not more seamless but is due to the database driven design of LR. :)
Is this true for the GFX 100S Raw files as well?
Not sure Todd, sorry. My guess would be that it is true, since they're still Fuji RAW files - just larger ones :)
@@Andyhutchinson I tried finding more information on the GFX 100S sensor, it is a Sony sensor that is shared with Hasselblad, but the processor is the Fujifilm X-Processor 4, so perhaps it is. I do know that Capture One handles the RAF files much better than Adobe Camera Raw. I feel I get pretty good noise reduction with Topaz Photo AI and Denoise, but maybe I need to update my DXO.
Firstly, great video Andy. First time viewer and now subscriber. In answer to Todd's question, I can't see any harm in using this on GFX100S files, but the 100S is a Bayer sensor and in my experience edits more like other Bayer sensors (after allowing for all those extra pixels) such as my Canon than my Fuji XT bodies in Lightroom. I'm going to give PureRaw another go on my XT files on the back of this video. I have tried Capture One but am so much more comfortable in Lightroom after years of use. I get by now in Lightroom by jus turning the sharpening right down from the default to avoid the "worms" and happy with the results 95% of the time. An early version of PureRaw did not exactly blow me away with any difference, but it looks like these new optimisations for Fuji files warrant another go.
@@dennisplester1542 Thanks Dennis!
and for Windows users ?
Yea - it's Windows and Mac.
To answer the question posed as title: YES, for me it is. Or rather, Photolab 7 with Filmpack 7, which includes the functionalities of PureRaw, but much, much more (e.g. more settings for denoising, applying alternative film simulations to exported DeepPRIME enhanced DNGs).
I have tried many applications for developing my X trans raw files, and combinations thereof. But using PL 7 with Filmback 7 (or only PureRaw) for basic development beats everything hands down, and beyond my expectations. FILE SIZE: With DeepPRIME XD, the size of exported DNG files depends on the properties of the image, thanks to the intelligence of the algorithm. Also, with PL7, I have the option to crop prior to exporting as DNG, which avoids unnecessarily large files.
I agree. I find it very interesting to compare the clarity of two Fuji RAW files side by side - one in DxO and one in any other RAW editor. With only the baseline demosaicing and fixes for lens softness etc - the quality difference is stark.
I can't stand the import function of LR and C1. I have my photos on my hard drive just the way I want them and so PL6 really does the business for me. As for processing Fuji raw files, PR3 and PL6 with a Fuji 40mp sensor makes full frame obsolete in my opinion. It's early days for PL6 for me, I wish it allowed me to apply Fuji film simulations after the fact, but I guess they want you to buy their versions of them. I have always minimally processed my photos. Anything more complicated than standard darkroom stuff is graphic arts, not photography. Again, just my opinion, but that's what 30+ years shooting film and working in a wet darkroom does to you... 🤪🤓
No arguments here, Edward. I come from a film background too, though I switched to digital back in the mid-90s. :)
@@Andyhutchinson The DXO film simulations are great! I downloaded the free trial and it's easy to apply Velvia or whatever. I also love the look of the Tri-x 400. I'm probably going to just buy the Photolab 6 Elite with the standard Filmpack and move on from C1.
Hi Edward, i agree keeping it minimal for processing is what it is about. i haven't purchased the camera yet and was wondering what Mb file size approx. does the pure raw convert produce ?
@@Ian50S I'll have to look that up for you when I get a chance, I'm on my other computer right now.
To answer the question in the title, no. Use X Raw Studio and tethered camera conversion.
Didn't find X RAW to be as good and it's missing the class-leading noise reduction.